To: joseffy who wrote (724156 ) 7/3/2013 12:07:31 AM From: FJB 2 RecommendationsRecommended By jlallen joseffy
Respond to of 1575214 Here is what Huffington Post said on the case so far:And the first week's evidence dramatically supports the defense theory that Zimmerman may have been legally justified in using lethal force to defend himself. One witness heard people "running" and saw two people engaged in a struggle and "flailing their arms," another witness saw two people struggling in a "ground and pound" encounter in which Martin appeared to be on top of Zimmerman. Photographs showed Zimmerman's injuries -- a bloody nose, scrapes, lumps, and two bloody cuts to his head. Evidence also showed that Zimmerman's clothes were wetter in the back, with bits of grass. Whatever a jury makes of this evidence -- and it is still early in the trial -- it seems that under no reasonable theory could a prosecutor argue that Zimmerman acted with a "depraved mind." Why? The concept of a depraved mind in criminal law traditionally is confined to cases in which a killer does not necessarily intend to kill anyone, but engages in such wanton and heinous conduct as to manifest an utter disregard for human life. The kinds of killings that historically have supported a depraved mind murder involve shooting into a crowd of people, planting a bomb in a public place, striking repeatedly a young child, and driving a car at an excessive speed into a crowded thoroughfare. Even assuming in these instances that the actor did not specifically intend to kill anyone, he had to know almost to a certainty that he would likely cause a person's death, and his depraved conduct therefore should be considered the equivalent of murder. But bringing a charge of depraved mind murder when a death results from a violent physical encounter as in the Zimmerman-Martin fight is an unreasonable and even irresponsible exercise of prosecutorial power. Why did Corey overcharge Zimmerman, knowing that the proof would support at most a charge of manslaughter? One reason may be to give her leverage in the event the defense was interested in a plea bargain. Some prosecutors bring more charges than the evidence warrants, or higher charges than the evidence warrants, in the belief that a defendant faced with a choice between going to trial and being found guilty of the more serious charges will feel pressure to accept a plea to a lesser crime, and a lesser penalty. And prosecutors know that as many as 95 percent of defendants plead guilty. So overcharging as a coercive tactic to induce a plea usually works. Moreover, overcharging works as a trial tactic as well. Overcharging usually is a win-win proposition for a prosecutor at trial. Presumably a jury could decide to convict of the higher charge, however unreasonable such a decision might be, especially when the crime involves an unlawful killing, and the obvious sympathy for the victim. But overcharging, as every prosecutor knows, also gives the jury a chance to compromise, and a jury verdict based on such compromise allows each member of the jury to feel that some measure of justice is being done. These considerations may have motivated Corey to charge Zimmerman with murder. But there may have been other considerations, including public pressure to charge murder. Given the national and even international notoriety of the case, Corey's announcement of the murder charge, whether or not based on the evidence, and whether or not motivated by personal or political considerations, appeared to be a hugely popular decision. Since it was preliminary to a trial, and appeared to be a reasonable exercise of prosecutorial discretion, there was no excessive criticism.Overcharging George Zimmerman With Murder Posted: 07/01/2013 6:06 pm Bennett L. Gershman Professor of Law, Pace huffingtonpost.com